Why you should keep paying the 'tampon tax'

From John Howard to Tony Abbott, generations of conservative male politicians have stifled a deep desire to simply scream “Dear lord, please stop them saying tampon!”, to argue in favour of subjecting feminine hygiene products to the goods and services tax.

Only one – former treasurer Joe Hockey – lacked the intestinal fortitude when, in 2015, he caved in to support calls for the axing of the so-called “tampon tax”.

Despite young feminists now strapping red-stained sanitary napkins to their heads in protest, Coalition lower house MPs are expected to hold the conservative line and vote down a Greens-initiated bill to exclude sanitary items from the GST, which passed the Senate on Monday.

But you don’t have to be an aging white conservative man to think purchasers of tampons should continue to pay GST.

Greens senators Janet Rice and Lee Rhiannon join protestors against the tampon tax, on the front lawn of Parliament House on Monday.Credit:Alex Ellinghausen

Advertisement

Miranda Stewart is a professor at the Melbourne University Law School and a fellow of the Australian National University’s Tax and Transfer Policy Institute.

She says women, as a group, stand to gain the most from a properly funded tax and transfer system.

“The debate about GST on tampons is a distraction. Women benefit from a well-funded tax system that can support public goods and services – that is what is under threat,” she says.

“We would be better off building the strength of our GST – by broadening the base – and also strengthening our income tax base, to ensure that we pay for services such as childcare and public education, rather than cutting the tax base further.”

Economists have long identified the GST as one of the most efficient taxes in the government’s revenue raising arsenal - precisely because it is so hard to avoid. It's meant to cover most household shopping, including necessities, not just luxuries. Company profits can be shifted offshore, and tax accountants can hide personal income, but everyone needs to go to the shops.

But exemptions carved out from the GST in 2000, including on fresh food, health and education, mean Australia’s relatively low GST rate of 10 per cent now only applies to about half of household spending.

Concern about taxing sanitary items often stems from concern about the access of low income women to these items.

But it is wealthy women who stand to benefit the most from any tax exemption.

A 2009-10 survey of household expenditure by the Bureau of Statistics found Australian households spend, on average, 64 cents a week on feminine hygiene products. But the top fifth of households by income spent 87 cents, compared to 36 cents by households in the lowest fifth.

Stewart proposes an alternative approach: “Why not say that all secondary schools and health clinics should dispense free tampons? If you’re worried about helping low income women – especially young women – why not do that?”

Or, even better yet, why not use the revenue raised from taxing tampons – or forgoing personal income tax cuts – to help fund cheaper childcare, assisting young women to take up their rightful – and equal – place in the workforce?